Psych CASC / OSCE · Professional — complaint management and regulation
Responding to a family complaint after unexpected death — CASC communication station
MRCPsych/FRANZCP-style CASC: complaint meeting skills, open disclosure stance, apology for experience, process clarity, and non-retaliatory professionalism.
On this page & tools
Target exams
Station brief
Format. Communication station, approximately 7–10 minutes active time after reading. You are a psychiatry consultant meeting a bereaved parent who has submitted a formal complaint. [1]
Candidate instructions. The parent believes the assessment was rushed and dismissive, and that staff did not listen. Listen first; acknowledge grief and the seriousness of the complaint; explain that you will be honest about known facts (open disclosure stance); outline next steps for review without promising outcomes you cannot control; avoid defensive argument, blame-shifting, or inventing legal section numbers; do not pressure them to withdraw. [1][2]
Candidate scenario
The parent is 58, tearful and angry. They say: "You people treated my child like a number. The doctor barely looked up. Now they are dead. I want answers and I want someone held responsible. I have already written to the hospital and I will go higher if I have to." They have a printed complaint letter. No legal representative is present. [1][3]
Marking domains
- Empathic opening; names grief; non-defensive stance
- Clarifies complaint goals: explanation, accountability, prevention, apology (Vincent-aligned)
- Open disclosure principles: what is known, what is under review, follow-up contact
- Explains process levels in plain language (local review vs further pathways) without invented statutes
- Avoids altering facts, blaming the deceased, or pressuring withdrawal
- Offers practical next steps and written follow-up
- Maintains professionalism under anger; safety-net if parent is acutely distressed [1][2][3]
Reveal assessor key
Open. Thank them for coming. Acknowledge the unbearable loss and the courage of raising concerns. Signal you take the complaint seriously and that the purpose today is listening and honest process, not argument. [1]
Explore. What happened from their perspective? What was most hurtful (tone, time, safety planning, follow-up)? What do they want from this process? Map clinical, management, and relationship elements without jargon lectures. [3]
Disclose stance. Explain you will share what is currently known; some details need formal review; you will not speculate or hide known facts. Patients and families generally want honesty after harm-related events. [2]
Process. Outline local serious-incident / complaint review principles, a named contact, timeline for further meeting, and how written responses work. Mention external or regulatory pathways exist if local process does not resolve concerns — principles only. [3]
Close. Summarise what you heard; apologise for their experience of care being dismissive if that is acknowledged; agree next contact; offer support resources for bereaved families; document after station. Do not promise that someone will be sacked. [1][2]
Note for examiners. Candidate should also be able to state offline that staff named in the complaint need second-victim support (Bourne) — may mention briefly if asked about staff welfare. [4]
References
- [1]Vincent C, Young M, Phillips A Why do people sue doctors? A study of patients and relatives taking legal action Lancet, 1994.PMID 7911925
- [2]Gallagher TH, Waterman AD, Ebers AG, Fraser VJ, Levinson W Patients' and physicians' attitudes regarding the disclosure of medical errors JAMA, 2003.PMID 12597752
- [3]Reader TW, Gillespie A, Roberts J Patient complaints in healthcare systems: a systematic review and coding taxonomy BMJ Qual Saf, 2014.PMID 24876289
- [4]Bourne T, Wynants L, Peters M, et al. The impact of complaints procedures on the welfare, health and clinical practise of 7926 doctors in the UK: a cross-sectional survey BMJ Open, 2015.PMID 25592686